Drudge Retort: Red Meat for Yellow Dogs
Thursday, February 21, 2008

A Navy missile soaring 130 miles above the Pacific smashed a dying and potentially deadly U.S. spy satellite Wednesday and probably destroyed a tank carrying 1,000 pounds of toxic fuel, officials said. Officials had expressed cautious optimism that the missile would hit the satellite, which was the size of a school bus. But they were less certain of hitting the smaller, more problematic fuel tank, whose contents posed what Bush administration officials deemed a potential health hazard to humans if it landed intact.

Liberal Blog Advertising Network

Menu

Subscriptions

Author Info

nanc

MORE STORIES

Special Features

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in the discussion of this weblog entry should note the site's moderation policy.

just heard this on the radio a few moments ago!

woot!

can you say "GOOD SHOT"?

if you can't, you may need a little more target practice.

GO NAVY!

p.s. - i heard initially the satellite was carrying 5,000 pounds of fuel...

The more I think about this whole shoot down, the less belief there is.

That such an anti-satellite system existed wasn't a total given. It just wasn't far off.

One really major reason for skepticism?

Since when did our truthfully smaller naval ships just happen to have an orbit capable missile in inventory? That super expensive satellite could have been a complete empty shell just to make it look real.

The fully planed in advance out of atmosphere chancy thing that wasn't, worked.

Congrats, the test was a full success.

i won't even comment on whether or not they did or didn't shoot down a satellite.

However, I have an engineer friend who worked on Kwajilan with anti-missile defense system tests. He said they missed 9 of 10 times shooting at missles from Vandenberg AFB when they knew exactly when they launched and the trajectory.

Little hard shooting things down at a combined 20,000 MPH I'd think. But, then again, who knows?

I wish I could've met you
Now, its a little late
What you could've taught me
I could've saved some face
They think that your early ending
Was all wrong
For the most part they're right
But look how they all got strong
That's why I say hey man nice shot
What a good shot man
A man
Has gun
Hey man
Have fun
Nice shot
Now that the smoke's gone
And the air is all clear
Those who were right there
Got a new kind of fear
You'd fight and you were right
But they were just too strong
They'd stick it in your face
And let you smell what they consider wrong
Thats why I say hey man nice, nice shot
What a good shot man
A man
Has gun
Hey man
Have fun
Nice shot
I wish I would've met you
I wish I would've met you
I'd say
Nice shot


www.youtube.com

Be Well.

/stage left.

correction to my statement above - the entire satellite weighed 5,000 pounds...

Damn! I wanted it to land in my backyard..I had plans on scrappin' that thing....hell,at $8.00 per hundred pound,it's worth at least $400!

Wouldn't you think they would have put a camera on the missle, and sent a live feed back to Earth?

This whole test had nothing to do with toxic fuel.

Bread and Circuses.



"Wouldn't you think they would have put a camera on the missle, and sent a live feed back to Earth?"

Posted by wisgod at 2008-02-21 08:55 AM

YEAH!

At between 40 and 60 million in American tax dollars you would think!


But I like this part of the "government" line best!

"smashed a dying and potentially deadly U.S. spy satellite Wednesday and probably destroyed a tank carrying 1,000 pounds of toxic fuel, officials said"

Note the words "potentially deadly" and "probably destroyed" as if that sounds conclusive! Then look at the comments coming from the "Fiscally Conservative", "Black and White" thinking, "Cant Trust Government" crowd giggle with glee and fawning approval of the governments "probably"!

conspeories abound!

they said photos would be available within 24 hours.

video update

"they said photos would be available within 24 hours."
Posted by nanc at 2008-02-21 10:09 AM
YEAH!

Then points us to a dead link!

"Conspeories"indeed!

Try not to hyperventilate neil! I would hate to see you sprain your principle hoisting the "g o v e r n m e n t" petard!

Wouldn't you think they would have put a camera on the missle, and sent a live feed back to Earth?

Posted by wisgod at 2008-02-21 08:55 AM

Check CNN-They did have a camera somewhere.

rnv - go to fox news videos - it was posted this evening - i pasted the link from the top of their page - don't know what happened. my apology. steve centanni was the reporter at the pentagon.

rnv - the link worked for me...pedal a little faster...

"steve centanni was the reporter at the pentagon"

YEAH!

Oh Goodie! I'm so relived!

I'm so glad he got to report how the Big Awesome Bush "government" protected us all from the evil shenanigans of "hydrazine" before all that "liberal" media tried to spoil this wonderful project that only cost of us $60,000 a gallon to destroy a chemical commonly used in liquid crystal displays, pharmaceuticals, air bags and thousands of other everyday products!

YEAH!

Interesting fact about the extreme danger of hydrazine!

"Only one human is known to have died from exposure to hydrazine hydrate."

Good thing we have you Fiscal "conservatives" responsibly looking out for the little people and our tax dollars!

does it hurt where you live?

The more I think about this whole shoot down, the less belief there is.

That such an anti-satellite system existed wasn't a total given. It just wasn't far off.

One really major reason for skepticism?

Since when did our truthfully smaller naval ships just happen to have an orbit capable missile in inventory? That super expensive satellite could have been a complete empty shell just to make it look real.

The fully planed in advance out of atmosphere chancy thing that wasn't, worked.

Congrats, the test was a full success.

Posted by keith204 at 2008-02-21 02:37 AM


Given a nights reflection on this "event". The chances of this shoot down being just "chance" and not planned, seem more and more remote.

So many things had to be virtually in place for this accidental event to work that it just isn't likely.

That special missile available, the proper launch platform, a dead satellite, China making lots of negative waves(from the US). Now, according to CNN, there was a camera recording the aftermath!

Coincidence? Seems like one hell of a string of coincidences to me. Not that there is the slightest objection to our having this ability. Bet on this, Russia will have this capability soonest. If not already.

China, with their demonstration, kicked off a small scale weapons development race with their launch.

A small guess. The US uses it's GPS system to guide just about everything. With the development of anti-satellite missiles the GPS system is in jeopardy. Or is it.

The US launches a fairly large number of secret military satellites every year. Take it for granted that the is at least one if not two back-up systems ready but dormant, to start up in time of need. Until that time nothing will be heard from them. Consider that several separate packages can be launched simultaneously. If just 6/8 units were put up per year in the past ten or so years, this would be a cinch.

CNN link for video

www.cnn.com


i, for one, am pleased that the u.s. has this capability.

i, for one, am pleased that the u.s. has this capability.
Posted by nanc at 2008-02-21 12:00 PM

YEAH!

What "capability" is that exactly? The "capability" of the "government" to eject literally tons of US Tax Dollars into space for no apparent reason?
Why not rely on the "private sector" to do this sort of thing? Isn't that the Bush Cult Line anyway (you know, the one that goes "The Private Sector does Everything Better than "Go v e r n m e n t")!? Or is that something no longer being regurgitated into your little bobble head Bird Mouth by the Talking Points gang?

rnv - i suppose they should have just let it crash to earth so you'd have something else to bitch about today, no?

you people and your half-empty cups are tiring.

"What "capability" is that exactly? The "capability" of the "government" to eject literally tons of US Tax Dollars into space for no apparent reason?"

As opposed to the gazillions we are pouring into Iraq???

I much rather spend tax money on something that helps us secure our domestic defenses than go nation-building in the ME guns-a-blazing.

I am all for toned down shows of force that aren't preceded or followed by alot of cock strutting and propaganda (if indeed such a thing exists, LOL). If this was a "message" sent to the Russians and the Chinese in regards to our capabilities then I think that it was handled fairly well.

Still, I don't take anything face value anymore, so I might possibly be mistaken.


conspeories.....

Posted by nanc

All I can say is WOW. I've seen misspelling before, and usually it is due to typing too fast, but this goes to another dimension!

i suppose they should have just let it crash to earth so you'd have something else to bitch about today, no?


Wee!

Exactly --- up to and except for the part where Spacelab did the same thing!

Anyway, this reminds me of an Andrew Dice joke, the one where he goes to buy a new car but just jacks off and saves himself 40 grand!

You people could have just jacked off on yourself and saved us all a boatload of cash!


"If this was a "message" sent to the Russians and the Chinese in regards to our capabilities then I think that it was handled fairly well."

YEAH!

However, I am at a loss as to how pretending it's done under the guise of public safety fits into the Texas Swagger posture --- if this was indeed intended to send a message!
I never knew the "Black and White" cowboy would turn out to be so nuanced and could have sworn only "liberals" did such things!

Good job! We showed them who's boss. The United States can shoot down satellites. The chinese and russians better "recognize"

Spamless video link: blog.wired.com

Excellent shot. Good job, boys.

When was the satellite launched?

I think it was 2006 - it "failed" soon after launch.

Congrate to the military on this success.
I remain amazed one can hit a speeding bullet with another speeding bullet.
That math astounds me.

"Bread and Circuses."

No, Ted. Just circuses. The Bush Administration figures we can all get along without bread.

This was an important test of our missile defense shields, which are deployed around the world, including on navy ships. We have alot of important satellites, which are exposed to attack if a country so desired.

"Bread and Circuses."

No, Ted. Just circuses. The Bush Administration figures we can all get along without bread.

This was an important test of our missile defense shields, which are deployed around the world, including on navy ships. We have alot of important satellites, which are exposed to attack if a country so desired.

This was an important test of our missile defense shields, which are deployed around the world, including on navy ships. We have alot of important satellites, which are exposed to attack if a country so desired.

This was an important test of our missile defense shields, which are deployed around the world, including on navy ships. We have alot of important satellites, which are exposed to attack if a country so desired.

If anybody would like to read about thhe threat in depth here is a good link.

How China Loses the Coming Space War

blog.wired.com


If this is one and done by the US fine....

If you go into the story link and look, you see that China's ASAT techn. was very advanced. The 2 satellites that hit head-on were going 18,000 MPH. China has the capability to take out our satellites, GPS, Spy camera, or early warning. But they can't take them all out. The US has so many satellites up there, and so many commercial (private) one's to use for bandwidth, they have many options to keep up the information link with are security needs.

The link provided has an excellent write up of China's ability to challenge the US. The MIT author suggests the US counter the threat by using this stance......

The first step the United States should take is a simple declaration that we guarantee the continued flow of information to any country whose satellite is destroyed by an ASAT. We could do this using either our military or civilian-owned satellites. After all, if the space assets of the United States are not vulnerable to attacks because of the inherent redundancy, the same cannot be said of China's other potential regional competitors such as Australia, India, or Japan. Each of these countries has only a handful of satellites that could be quickly destroyed if China chooses to attack them. This declaration would effectively eliminate any military advantage that a country might get from attacking its neighbors limited fleet of satellites. After that, we should adopt the code of conduct that is being developed by the Stimson Center that establishes "rules of the road" for responsible space-faring nations. Finally, we should work toward a treaty banning the future testing of these most dangerous of anti-satellite weapons: the so-called "kinetic kill interceptors" that create such large amounts of debris. It'd be a first step towards containing the worst effects on war in space.

geezer - it's a combo of the words "conspiracy" and "theory". it's MY word!! google it if you don't believe me.

WTF sorry about the 4x post...


BTW Redneck you should study a subject matter before posting.....maybe you would add something worth commenting on for a change

"cannot be said of China's other potential regional competitors such as Australia, India, or Japan. Each of these countries has only a handful of satellites that could be quickly destroyed if China chooses to attack them."



What Year is it for you?


Did you think all this up yourself?

I don't know about you but ---- I wouldn't be blowin' up what I was already on the way to Ownin'!

"For the first time in my adult life, I am REALLY proud to be an American"

Hillbillyjihad

Or Michelle Obama..You decide

YEAH!

And do you "destroy" your customers?

All I'm sayin' is if this was a test of some "shield", (as moronic as that is) why not just say so!

Is it because shooting a satellite down sounds stupid when talking about a "shield" to protect our satelitte from being shot down by some other, and always invisible, "country" that wants to kill you and "your way of life" by satelitte!

Since when did our truthfully smaller naval ships just happen to have an orbit capable missile in inventory?

The SM-3 missile was created for the Navy's "Theater Wide Missile Defense" program, and successfully test-launched from the USS Lake Erie (the same ship that shot down the satellite last night) way back in January 2001.

So, "since when" is seven years ago.

Given the shuttle goes up and repairs sattelites then this could potentially have been done when it originally went wrong.

Thinks its a ruse to test a new missile that took a few years of planning to justify it.

We have to keep up with China, they can do it so must we.

Hits the satellite and every thing else someone wants to shoot at us!

Go Navy

Wasn't there an ammendment by Reed removing 50 billion from the Star Wars funding? Any guesses how Barack and the Hidabeast voted? BTW it failed despite the two Dem candidates for President votes. Not sure why the article doesn't mention it was part of the Missile Defense Star Wars program.

Redneck,

You keep bitching about the cost of shooting down that satalite. Your portion was a few pennies. If I send you $1.00, will you shut the fuck up?

Your portion was a few pennies. If I send you $1.00, will you shut the fuck up?

How much will you give me to shut me up if I complain about government debt?

"You keep bitching about the cost of shooting down that satalite. Your portion was a few pennies. If I send you $1.00, will you shut the fuck up?"

You keep bitching about the cost of supporting Social Security and other general welfare programs. Your portion is a few pennies. If I send you $1.00, will you shut the fuck up?

Hans

Well Hans, there is a small matter of about $60 trillion in unfunded debt.

If this was supposed to impress the Chinese and Russians, I have my doubts. It was done under ideal weather conditions, calm seas and the trajectory of the satellite was known. The hydrazine explanation was a crock of shit.

Bet they can't shoot down a missile coming from Iran or Pakistan heading for Israel.

Bet they can't shoot down a missile coming from Iran or Pakistan heading for Israel.

Posted by Ray at 2008-02-21 08:58 PM

Do they travel faster than the satelite we knocked out?

bet we'll never have to worry about it!

Can't you guys for once look beyond your hatred for the Military and the US to see the pro's in this?

What if a rouge general in Russia decides to launch one at us...or a Islamic fundamentalist gets control of a Ukraninian missile...wouldn't it be nice to know the technology to shoot it down worked before our lives depended on it?

How much money are the lives of the millions of people around DC or NY or LA worth if we could not bring one down because we never truly tested a defense system?

I would much rather spend my tax money keeping myself and my family alive ( and even yours) than to give it to some lazy SOB that can't get off their ass long enough to get a job so that they have health care.

here-here, foshaffer! another voice of reason.

personally, i'd pay extra to have more military and less to have less deadbeats.

You keep bitching about the cost of supporting Social Security and other general welfare programs. Your portion is a few pennies. If I send you $1.00, will you shut the fuck up?

Hans

Posted by Hans at 2008-02-21 08:31 PM

This shows how truely fucking stupid you really are. Did I ever make a comment about social security and other general welfare programs?

Now is where you go back through all my old posts and cry because you are as big of an ass as you sound.

Admit it hans, you hate the military and every thing positive about the military and this counrty. You are basically a chicken shit coward.

And just for the record stupid. I dont like all the welfare programs and would rather see people get a job and make their own way. The problem is that the more handouts the Govt. gives, the more hands that will be out there to take it.

Its a fact that some people need help, but help does not go on forever. Unlike your stupidity.

the budget pie is cut into portions that are designated to differing programs - for instance, what is allotted to defense may not be spent, say, in education; or what is spent on roads, may not be spent on welfare.

budgets are called budgets for a reason - i don't spend my grocery money on bikini waxing.

if we keep to our budgets, nobody need whine.

if you whine, don't be surprised when someone cuts the cheese and hands you a slice.

p.s. - that was just a short lesson in economics -101

"i don't spend my grocery money on bikini waxing."

So do you eat well or enjoy sunbathing?

I'm glad they can hit junk a long way off.

Instead of us here at home.

It means my tax $ hasn't gone all to waste. Science is wonderful.

You keep bitching about the cost of supporting Social Security and other general welfare programs. Your portion is a few pennies. If I send you $1.00, will you shut the fuck up?

Hans

Posted by Hans at 2008-02-21 08:31 PM


WIth SS's budget at 625 gigabucks and about 180,000,000 taxpayers, that's a lot of pennies: 347,222 to be exact. Count general welfare, (health and human services) and it's about double.

www.federalbudget.com

Maybe it's just the local dialect where you live (lala land?), but here in Texas a few usually means less than 10, not ~700,000

And just for the record stupid. I dont like all the welfare programs and would rather see people get a job and make their own way. The problem is that the more handouts the Govt. gives, the more hands that will be out there to take it.

SICKOFLIBS


Thank your lucky stars then that Bill Clinton had Welfare Reform as one of his main campaign themes in 1992, and was then able to get it passed

Signed,
SickOfIdiots

Can't you guys for once look beyond your hatred for the Military and the US to see the pro's in this?

FOSHAFFER


Another example of absolutely idiotic rhetoric.

Good job, Navy...

WIth SS's budget at 625 gigabucks and about 180,000,000 taxpayers, that's a lot of pennies: 347,222 to be exact. Count general welfare, (health and human services) and it's about double.

Don't forget the cost of all the illegal immigrants who collect free $$$

"Do they travel faster than the satelite we knocked out?"
Posted by crispee_oc at 2008-02-21

YEAH!

Was the satellite geo-stational?

Usualy communication satellites are!

"What if a rouge general in Russia decides to launch one at us...or a Islamic fundamentalist gets control of a Ukraninian missil"

Like on 9-11?

And when did a geo-stational satelitte mimic a "missle" and how does it keep YOU "safe" in any way!

You people always run around in fear of the invisible while egnoring the real threat (like on 9-11!
Do any of you recall the speech Condi was set to deliver on 9-11? It was about the Bush plan to revive "star wars"!

How safe did they make you?

The fucking irony of you fools sometimes!

You all do realize that the cold war is starting up again, right? But this time we've got good old China in there as well, yipee! At least they have a lot of cash to throw around. India will be along soon, as well, I presume.

That's all this charade was about. Let's see what the Russians do next, hopefully something that'll really wow the folks in the orchestra seats...

Shock and Awe wins the day. But you have to wonder about our confidence when they had to hold fire until the Space Shuttle had landed. I mean, the SS was up there in the sky somewhere and they seemed to be trying to be sure we didn't hit it instead.

America - Typical left statement with no thought. "Another example of absolutely idiotic rhetoric." OK...WHY?

Why is "Can't you guys for once look beyond your hatred for the Military and the US to see the pro's in this?" idiotic

-when virtually every post refers to this as a waste of money, or a way to escalate a cold war or exclaiming how much more advanced the Chinese test was (thank you Bill Clinton for selling them advanced guidance systems)

If you are going to call someone an idiot....at least state why you think that...and if you can't..who is the idiot?

they've been indoctrinated into the school of leftist thought. they're contraries.

Wow how awesome, they hit a target with a known and stable trajectory for only $60milion. Kinda like a canned hunt. At least the satellite will not be a danger anymore. And if you think that this was some impromptu thing ask yourself this why not just send the shuttle up to collect the satellite?

But don't let me rain on the parade I bet all your dicks feel at least 2 inches bigger cuz Merica showed them ChiComs we kin shoot us a satellite down too. Only we did not have the balls to come out and say what we were doing.

"Was the satellite geo-stational?

Usualy communication satellites are!"


Posted by Redneckville

Just a little research goes a long, long way.

Geostationary satellites sit out in what has been coined the Clarke orbit at approximately 35,786 km/22,240 statute miles above the equator and orbit over the same ground point with the rotation of the Earth. This is a stable orbit in terms of gravitational balance at which to place a satellite. There are a minimum of perturbations that would destabilize the satellite. The major component in a satellite's life is the amount of propellant it can carry versus how much is used to maintain orbital integrity. The Clarke orbit is ideal in that very little propellant is required for station keeping. In addition to a host of military comm sats, the Clarke orbital region is also where you'll find all the entertainment sats: the Galaxy series for satellite TV, Sirius sats, the XM sats (Rock, Roll, and soon, Jazz), etc.

USA 193 was a whole different flavor of satellite. It was a recon sat, pure and simple, launched for/by the National Reconnaissance Office (NRO). Termed a LEO (Low-Earth Orbit), it had an orbital period of around 92 minutes at 376 km by 354 km/233 miles by 220 miles, inclined 58.5 degrees. This would actually put it in altitude range for retrieval and repair by the shuttle, but you have to catch the sat first. USA 193 was intercepted and terminated at an altitude of 130 miles, just at the top of the atmosphere, well within range and capability of the SM-3, which was designed primarily for sea-based ballistic missile defense. A good feat and an excellent proof of concept.

"Can't you guys for once look beyond your hatred for the Military and the US to see the pro's in this?"

They can't. They can't grok that the US of A does need a strong defense.

Absolutely there have been failures in American foreign policy, this latest administration being the most miserable of them all. This does not negate the fact that the US, as does any other country, needs to be able to defend itself. The person who thought up this idea to deal with failed USA 193 should get a medal, because it accomplished two things: not only did it mostly eliminate a potential threat to people and property on the ground, it demonstrated to the world that the US does have at least some capability of dealing with incomings from orbit. Next time, it may not be a failed spy sat.

"why not just send the shuttle up to collect the satellite?"

Posted by Salaryman

Hmmmmmmm... How long a list do y'a need?

Finally, despite the democrats herculean efforts to sabotage the efforts, the vison of our greatest Leader, his Royal Highness Ronald Reagan have come to fruition. And again Democrats have been proven wrong.It will work, Amnericans are the smartest, most ingenious, Most productive people on the planet and despite the democrats continuing efforts to brainwash weak-minded liberals into believing we are no better than Chad or Nepal, Still some Americans have not bought into that and proven just waht we can do with true vision and leadership.

OBama say "Yes, we can" but to him that means,
Yes, We can, take more money and give it to people who don't want to share in the burden of their own existence

Yes, we can have the governement run everything and decide what "you" are deserving of and I will employ lefgions of bureacrats to run it as efficiently as evrything the "people complain about.

Yes, we can go back to the days of Jimmy Carter

But Reagan, Said "yes, we can "slip the surly binds of our own limitations and soar to the stars"

I think I like Reagan

Zot,
My understanding was the satelite traveled around 17,000 MPH and the missile actually was hit by the satelite. I am not sure why the Redneck spewed his crap pasting my post. It was in reponse to not being able to shoot down a Pakistan or Iranian missile headed for Israel. I wasn't sure if the missiles moved faster than a satelite in orbit.

Hey Zot, Just one good reason would do.

And Hillbillary, WTF are you talking about? It was Kennedy that got us into space. All Ronnie did was funnel a bunch of money into the pockets of corupt rich people. Star Wars is a Star Joke try with an actual missle not a sat you ahve been traking for years with a predictable orbit. So go pound your chest some more little ape, and don't bother to realize that we did little more than piss $60 mil into the ocean.

But Reagan, Said "yes, we can "slip the surly binds of our own limitations and soar to the stars"

I think I like Reagan

Posted by HillBillyJihad at 2008-02-22 10:02 AM |


If not us, who? If not now, when?

"They can't. They can't grok that the US of A does need a strong defense"

YEAH!

But from what this exactly defends us from is the question!

It sure as hell aint gonna stop someone with a box knife from flying a plan into something now is it!

Sadly though, when Condi and Bush ignored the august PDB informing the Bush Cult of "OBL Wishes to Attack with Planes" (the real threat) they were busy preparing to give a speech (on 9-11 no less) on the urgent need to revive "star wars" to "protect" us (from an imaginary threat)!


And china already owns most of you ---- why would they attack their best customers!

You people really need to make the jerk into this century!

You people really need to make the jerk into this century!

Posted by Redneckville at 2008-02-22 10:12 AM


Funny how you think NASA is just a big waste of money. Yet NASA was instrumental in the birth of the Internet. You know that tool you use to spew your vile, senseless, unhappy, worthless thoughts. Put your money where your little mouth is and get the fuck off the internet. At least then we will know someone in the real world would bitch slap your Appalachian ass if you happen to find the balls to say to them what you post here.

Who said NASA was a waste of money? The NSA probably is. But NASA could use some more money and probably better management.

"Hey Zot, Just one good reason would do."

Posted by Salaryman

Okay. It costs upwards of $500 million to refurb, transport, prep, and launch one STS mission. This does not include the costs of the mission itself.

Funny how you think NASA is just a big waste of money

YEAH!

Who said anything about NASA?

All I said was the fake, straight shooter, swaggering windshield cowboy "tough" guy saying he is going to shoot down a satellite because "it might hurt somebody" is totally inconsistent with the image you people try to portray, and, that spending between 40 and 60 million dollars to prove some dumb ass idea that hanging bombs and missiles over our heads is going to make us safe from an invisible, hypothetical and insanely expense threat is a dumb dumb dumb use of resources!
Especially when we are already hemorrhaging cash in iraq like a Hilton Slut on a Binge!


You people keep talking about how we are fighting 2nd century goat herders who live in caves ----- as if 2nd century cave men goat herders come with intercontinental ballistic missiles and death ray satellites!
Fucking A!

"But from what this exactly defends us from is the question!"

Posted by Redneckville

It's always been a given that any ballistic missile defense system is incapable of stopping 100% of a massed enemy launch. But only a handful of countries have true ICBM capability and most of those are our buddies. Russia and China both know that a nuclear strike against the US will only culminate in their own destruction. But there is always the possibility that a rogue power with a launch system or two would attempt a strike against the US. This is where these systems such as the SM-3 would be most effective.

Of course, a ballistic missile strike is only one method of bringing down the nuclear fire. Cruise missile tech is the most frightening of all as there are land, air, and sea launched systems already deployed by China and Russia that the US is incapable of stopping. But this should not imply that the US should drop its pants entirely.

But beyond these systems being meant for BMD, the launch and success of the SM-3 did provide proof of concept in a real situation. This will not be the only failed sat to decay and threaten people and property on the ground. And in theory, systems such as this could be used to deflect or destroy a limited meteor strike. Yeah, I know that this sounds a bit sci-fi-ish, but y'a never know.

Funny how you think NASA is just a big waste of money

YEAH!

Who said anything about NASA?
Posted by Redneckville at 2008-02-22 10:47 AM

What "capability" is that exactly? The "capability" of the "government" to eject literally tons of US Tax Dollars into space for no apparent reason?

Posted by Redneckville at 2008-02-21 12:58 PM

Dam Zot, That was a good answer.I can't just give up so quickly though how much of that 500 is actual cost and how much is inflated cost so the excess can be funneled off to fund other crap? I am sure that we could bring that cost down if we actually got serious about the space program.

Zot, I don't see how the launch was a successful proof of concept. Shooting down a satellite that has been tracked for years is relatively trivial. Now lets see it done against a real target.

like what, salaryman?

" I am sure that we could bring that cost down if we actually got serious about the space program."

Posted by Salaryman

My biggest critique of STS was it was designed and built literally on a shoestring budget. We ended up with what I irreverently call the Flying Yugo. Sure it works. It'll get from point A to B and back. But then you practically have to rebuild the entire thing before you can take it up again. The solid rocket boosters need to be recovered and refurbished. The main fuel tank is of course jettisoned and later deorbits and burns up, so that needs to be replaced. The shuttle itself is rather beat up after reentry. Many of the heat absorbing tiles need to be replaced and each one of them is unique. And of course, the shuttle is not refurbed at the landing site. It needs to be transported piggy-back on a modified 747 to Palmdale, CA, then ferried back to Kennedy for mating with the boosters and new fuel tank.

Complex, expensive, and time consuming.

China and Russia have already tested their anti-satellite weapons. It was inevitable that the US would follow. That being said, I think this was a legit action. It's entirely likely that a satellite failed and it was a good opportunity to test the weapon.

I think it shows the better side of American nature that they'd test it to save lives (although it could be argued that the real reason was to destroy high tech equipment).

As for the US "winning" a war with China... A Chinese general has already stated that his country would be willing to turn the west coast of the US into radioactive slag so I guess everything would depend on how much the US is willing to lose to win.

You hit the nail on the head. I guess my main point is less money on weapon systems more money on useful space programs. Face it at some point the Earth is going to be blown up. The list of potential disasters is very long, and the only chance for long term ( by that I mean in a geological or even cosmic time frame) survival is to have a presence in space.

Salaryman, I couldn't agree more. We should've been pushing for a permanent presence in space since man landed on the moon. We've seen the fossil record, we know that our time on this planet is likely limited. And we should do it because we can.

And lets not forget...

It's just cool.

Okay, do I get to pick the next target? The Geo-Synch's are in the outter ring, LEO's in the inner one.

"the only chance for long term ... survival is to have a presence in space."

Fascinatingly enough though, once the colonization of space begins, be it in orbit or on another planet, divergences will occur.

As we are who are born into and are adapted by the ecosytem on Planet Earth, those born into another ecosytem (artificial or not) will be adapted by their new environments. They will no longer be strictly human, but rather other than human.

For example, those who colonize Mars will be eventually adapted by Mars. Their children and their children's children will be the New Martians. They will not be able to visit the Mother World without powered exoskeletons to assist them in the greater gravity of Earth, or without breathing/filtering systems to protect them from organisms and pollutants inherent in Earth's atmosphere.

It has been postulated that those who would colonize orbital habitats would have little use for gravity and eventually would become almost a new species: longer lithe bodies, long grasping toes and fingers, not very strong, but very flexible. Earther's in contrast would be plodding, clumsy, chunky, smelly beings.

"For example, those who colonize Mars will be eventually adapted by Mars.

Posted by ZOT at 2008-02-22 01:42 PM"

Isn't this only true if the Martian chicks only procreate with Martian dudes who have particular traits, or if certain Martians just die off without reproducing? Or are you thinking of advantageous mutations, or?

holy crappe, zot!

you didn't just wet yourself, didja? or are you in the midst of a bradbury book?

Mmmmmmm.... Martian babage...

"you didn't just wet yourself, didja? or are you in the midst of a bradbury book?"

Posted by nanc

No wetting (I'm saving myself for later). No Bradbury (did him many moons ago). Too much sci-fi and aerospace work, I guess.

Interesting concepts Zot, of course that is presuming that humans can even survive long term in space. And when the sun burns out we and the neohumans will probably be toast. Just imagine if it went Nova today.

As we are who are born into and are adapted by the ecosytem on Planet Earth, those born into another ecosytem (artificial or not) will be adapted by their new environments. They will no longer be strictly human, but rather other than human

As did the humans in Larry Niven's "Integral Trees"?

Anyhow, I disagree, Zot. Here's why. I think humans have stopped evolving. In fact, it could be argued that we are devolving but I'm not going there. We put a very high premium on human life. We go to great extremes to keep all alive. A couple of centuries ago, someone with a genetic defect as sickle cell anemia or hemophilia had a greater chance of dying before passing on his defective genes. That is no more.

In the case of Mars, as long as we keep people alive in artificial environments, they will never adapt to a Martian environment. In the strictest Darwinian scope, an organism does not make "x" happen so that he can better survive. "X" happens because of an accidental mutation and the benefactor then passes on this trait.

Perhaps, though, evolution will continue through genetic engineering. In this way I can see humans adapting to extraterrestrial environments.

"Just imagine if it went Nova today."

Couldn't. I'd be toast. (Mmmmmmmm... toasty.)

You allude to the Big Question, of course: can humans even survive long term in space? It hasn't been done. No I don't really consider spending a couple of months in strung together high tech tin cans orbiting Earth or a handful of jaunts to the Moon and back as surviving long-term in space. I suppose we will see the beginning of the answer to the Big Question when we finally get around to sending manned (and womanned!!) missions to Mars.

"can humans even survive long term in space? "

On Spaceship Earth, so far so good.
-Bucky

Just imagine if it went Nova today.

If it did, everything we know about stellar evolution gets thrown out of the window.

"In the case of Mars, as long as we keep people alive in artificial environments, they will never adapt to a Martian environment."

Posted by goatman

But being that it will be an artificially created environment to suit humans, it will not be an Earth environment. And there is a host of other environmental factors that will be quite life changing, such as the total lack of free water or greenery. Nor will the gravity be the same, being that Martian gravity is .38 of Earth normal. So the divergence will have already begun. Once the original colonists begin to breed, their children will be adapted by whatever environmental factors are present, again, gravity, or lack thereof, being a biggie.

Type 2 supernovas and the Chandrasekar limit... hmmm.

From what I've read even short term time in space, even with exercise, leads to loss of bone and muscle mass.

Seems like a couple of years would result in them withering away.

Once the original colonists begin to breed, their children will be adapted by whatever environmental factors are present, again, gravity, or lack thereof, being a biggie.

This assumes no interference in the process of natural selection. As long as we keep everyone alive -- including those with genetic traits that are disadvantageous to Martian life -- we cannot adapt.

Example: As you pointed out, it would be a great advantage to be able to survive on less water if we lived on Mars. In an unfettered Darwinian environment, those who are able to survive on less water will live and pass on that trait. Those who need more water than the environment has to offer would die.

However, since we humans keep everyone alive, we would ensure that the water lovers got all the water they needed to survive. The water lovers would then reproduce and pass on their water loving genes thus ensuring that we never adapt to a low water environment.

"I mean, the SS was up there in the sky somewhere and they seemed to be trying to be sure we didn't hit it instead.

Posted by TurnLeftb42late "


or did you stop to think, that just maybe...they were about to create a whole lot of debris?

and oh I don't know, they didn't want to have to risk traveling through it. I really doubt they thought they'd go all gooberish on us and be like "well dang, that there weren't a satellite, that there was the derned shuttle.....oopsie"

"Zot, I don't see how the launch was a successful proof of concept. Shooting down a satellite that has been tracked for years is relatively trivial. Now lets see it done against a real target."


The satellite has been up for 16 months according to npr yesterday.

The first test of the SM-3 missile from the USS Lake Erie took place in January 2001.

As good as the Bush administration has been in the area of building missile defense, I'm pretty sure that the first month of Bush's administration didn't put the weapon system on the USS Lake Erie within days of him taking office.

Give President Clinton some credit.

Oh wait, never mind.

Yeah, it's Bush's fault the government has wasted money fielding a missile defense system that works yet was on the shelf and never deployed for 8 years.

;0P

Comments are closed for this entry.

Drudge Retort

Home | News | Comments | User Blogs | Nooner | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | Copyright 2009 World Readable